4K vs. 10bit 4.2.2.ProRes

I'm about to buy an external monitor for my GH4 camera. The choice is between the SmallHD 501 and the BlackMagic Videoassist. The Videoassist also has internal 10bit 4.2.2. Prores recording and is even a lot cheeper than the 501. (P.t. nobody has any realworld experience with the Videassist, as it has not been released yet.)

Got the GH4 a month ago and until now I have recorded in 4K (internal 8 bit) and put the footage on a 1080 timeline. Before the GH4 my footage was normal 1080 HD on a 1080 timeline. I don't have a 4K monitor myself and don't deliver anything in 4K.
I know the advantage of being able to reframe the 4K footage in a 1080 timeline and the better resolution. Regarding the ProRes I have read about the high headroom for grading 10 bit 4.2.2. .

Which one of the two would be the better, - 4K or ProRes?

For a few bucks extra you might consider the Atomos Shogun, too. We bought it recently and it's a really neat device. Records 4K and you can even output 10bit straight from the GH4 into the Shogun. This way you can keep your recording at full 4K resolution. Atomos just announced a so called "Action Pack" which adresses some initial flaws (includes for example a sturdy bumper, a screen protector and a sunhood) and you can get it for free if you order in June.

I have no connection to Atomos. So far I am just really happy with the new toy

"Which one of the two would be the better, - 4K or ProRes?"

ProRes can be any resolution you want, it is resolution independent. ProRes, in any of its flavors, can be SD, 720, 1080, 2K, 2.5K, 4K, 5K.

I assume you're asking which is better, native H.264 4K (or AVCDH 4K) from a camera card, or ProRes 4K. For heavy effects and compositing processing, and serious color grading, ProRes. But if your hardware runs the native format (be it H.264 or AVCHD or RAW), then go with the smaller, heavier compressed native files.

10-bit video is better for heavy effects/compositing and color grading than 8-bit. Again, with ProRes you're system will have better performance over the native compressed camera file format.

Does a ProRes 10-bit 4K file bog your Mac down more than an 8-bit 4K ProRes file? On paper yes, a tad, but in real world, with good hardware specs, you probably won't experience a huge difference.

The Atomos Shogun is without doubt very nice, but unfortunately too expensive - anyway where I live - for my use.

Guess I didn't made myself quite clear. In fact I mainly need a not too large monitor (my eyes are not what they used to be). The Videoassist happens to be a recorder too which the 501 is not.

BenB - I didn't mean 4K ProRes. The Videoassist does not record 4K, only HD H.264 10 bit 4.2.2 ProRes (am I expressing this right?). Guess I should have asked what are the pros and cons between GH4 internal 8 bit 4K and H.264 10 bit 4.2.2 ProRes in general picture quality and in editing/grading?

Same differences I mentioned.

I think he's asking what would be better - AVCHD 8bit 4K - or - 10bit 422 ProRes HD.

I have never used anything 4K yet (still hoping to get a Odyssey 7Q for my FS700 some day). But I think it comes down to how much grading you do in post. If you like to really push your footage I'm guessing that 10bit HD is the way to go.

Cheers

And the answer I gave addresses that directly. There is no simpler answer, there are variables, it's not a yes or no answer.

But you were talking about 4K vs 4K and that was never the question as I understand it, so wanted to clear that up a bit

DmitriZigany wrote: I think he's asking what would be better - AVCHD 8bit 4K - or - 10bit 422 ProRes HD.

Excatly

Then there are even more variables. Which is better? For what purpose? That's not a cut and dry question, the answer is not black and white. Same principles apply. What will be done with it, what is the delivery format? All that can be said in general is:

1 - AVCHD will require more hardware to playback then ProRes, any format.
2 - For straight cuts, very little grading, highly compressed camera formats work well, if you have enough hardware to play them back well.
3 - For heavy grading and effects, ProRes will hold up much better.
4 - For round tripping to other apps, ProRes will hold up much better.
5 - Shooting 4K to edit 1080 is OK, not flawless, and the above still applies.
6- Delivery specs will dictate your workflow, and without this information, specific answers can't be given.

bluefonia wrote:

DmitriZigany wrote: I think he's asking what would be better - AVCHD 8bit 4K - or - 10bit 422 ProRes HD.

Excatly

in addendum to what Ben wrote:
Impossible to answer such a question ... bigger numbers doesn't mean automatically 'better' quality, just to mention "moire', 'low light performance', 'costs of media', 'costs of glas'; a 'better' camera asks for 'better' peripheral ... lights, audio, recorder, drives ....

Finally: can you handle such a better device? To drench out the last bits of quality? ... stoneold, divisively discussed, but I like to remember at the Zacuto Shootout - in the hands of an excellent DoP, even a phone delivers 'better' quality ... :lol:

… not meant offensive, but those 'better by numbers'-discussions get soon academical … imho.

I assume bluefonia is asking H.264 (common 4K videos) and ProRes,which codec is better?
ProRess keep pretty large file size while H.264 is highly compressed. If you have enough spaces, I recommend ProRes.

whitemax wrote: I assume bluefonia is asking H.264 (common 4K videos) and ProRes,which codec is better?

No, the question is if you get better results with a worse codec (H.264, 8bit) in 4K or with a better codec (ProRes) but in lower resolution, HD.
He is not asking which codec is better or worse, that he is very aware of.